[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I know. I was trying not to implicate you in it. You were just providing cites that the kind of propagagnda that SA was referring to at least existed outside of his mind and that he wasn’t making it up. He seemed to think your cites bolstered the substance of his claims themselves, which was not something that YOU claimed.
[/QUOTE]
Nor was it something I claimed; Dunawake’s post was similar to Lib’s post in that it helped to substantiate my claim that the allegations were made in the first place, something that had been sorely missing in this thread prior to their posts.
So, the claim is that right-wing propagandists were sitting in on the secretive meetings that Hillary had with her socialist friends and were therefore privy to ideas that they rejected, ideas that would have been bad, and that the right-wing propagandists therefore went out and told everyone that these bad ideas were going to become law, even though the secret socialists came out of their secretive socialist meetings with a proposal that did not include these bad ideas?
[QUOTE=Dunawake]
I did some Googling to try and find other pages that echo something of the concept that SA has that “harsh penalties were to be given to patients and doctors who to tried to go outside the system.” I’ve found two links that express the same sentiment. Whether or not the statements are true, they do exist outside SA’s mind.
Good Christ, the logic of Scientology is looking downright reasonable next to this crapscicle of an argument.
Hell, he’s making Ann Coulter look sane and logical. The only thing that would make sense is that Starving Artist is a far-left extremist, trying to make the right look bad.
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness]
So, the claim is that right-wing propagandists were sitting in on the secretive meetings that Hillary had with her socialist friends and were therefore privy to ideas that they rejected, ideas that would have been bad, and that the right-wing propagandists therefore went out and told everyone that these bad ideas were going to become law, even though the secret socialists came out of their secretive socialist meetings with a proposal that did not include these bad ideas?
Huh.
Daniel
[/QUOTE]
In the world of right wing paranoia, this passes for maning sense! :eek:
Paranoia strikes deep; into your life it will creep. (They made good construction equipment in those days!)
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
Good Christ, the logic of Scientology is looking downright reasonable next to this crapscicle of an argument.
Hell, he’s making Ann Coulter look sane and logical. The only thing that would make sense is that Starving Artist is a far-left extremist, trying to make the right look bad.
[/QUOTE]
Whew! Guin disapproves of me! Thank goodness, I was beginning to doubt myself there for a while. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I personally know only one person who ever read all 1000 pages of that plan from cover to cover. It was my mother. She was a reporter and she had to read it. Most of the pols who voted on it and talked about it only read summaries themselves.
[/QUOTE]
So I guess what we’ve got is an incomprehenisble 1,000 page bill that not even the lawmakers themselves understand or know what all it contains.
So this means you don’t really know if I’m wrong or not, huh, guys?
[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
So I guess what we’ve got is an incomprehenisble 1,000 page bill that not even the lawmakers themselves understand or know what all it contains.
[/quote]
I didn’t say it was incomprehensible. only that lawmakers didn’t bother to read it. From what I understand, it’s SOP for them to only read summaries for long, involved bills.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I didn’t say it was incomprehensible. only that lawmakers didn’t bother to read it. From what I understand, it’s SOP for them to only read summaries for long, involved bills.
[/QUOTE]
I know. I was just funnin’.
Btw, anyone interested can watch Hillary’s eye-rollingly phony performance here. She appears at first to be hamming it up and having fun, and then gets serious in her cornpone right before she mentions "Mayur Palllmur…raht her frum…Trentin, New Jersey.
Why anybody would believe a word out of this woman’s mouth is a mystery to me. Frankly, I don’t think her supporters care whether she’s telling the truth about anything or not, they just know that she’s a Democrat and that’s good enough for them.
[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
As I said: I’m open to ignorance-fighting here. Did she, or did she not, say she wanted to “take things from [us] for the common good?” While I’m sure she would try to explain this comment in some more palatable way after the fact, I’ve never heard before that this isn’t what she actually said.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=BayleDomon]
If that is exactly what she said, then I for one am impressed by Hillary’s linguistic ability to pronounce brackets.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe she did she did some of the Victor Borge stuff.
[Quote=Starving Artist]
So this means you don’t really know if I’m wrong or not, huh, guys?
[/Quote]
Not me. I believe the OP’s absolutely correct. Hillary Clinton wants to deny medical care people who can pay for it, and to throw doctors and patients in jail for some unknown reason. I don’t know why anyone is even arguing against this point. She was obvioulsy highly disappointed that she wasn’t able to throw people in jail for no reason while she was first lady (woman scorned and all that), and that disappointment has burned so fiercely that she is running for President just so she can have a chance to cheat folks out of medical care and throw them in jail again. I believe it; hell, I have to believe it. After all, it’s Starving Artist and as we all know, he’s never made a partisan statement in all his life.
[QUOTE=El_Kabong]
Not me. I believe the OP’s absolutely correct. Hillary Clinton wants to deny medical care people who can pay for it, and to throw doctors and patients in jail for some unknown reason. I don’t know why anyone is even arguing against this point. She was obvioulsy highly disappointed that she wasn’t able to throw people in jail for no reason while she was first lady (woman scorned and all that), and that disappointment has burned so fiercely that she is running for President just so she can have a chance to cheat folks out of medical care and throw them in jail again. I believe it; hell, I have to believe it. After all, it’s Starving Artist and as we all know, he’s never made a partisan statement in all his life.
[/QUOTE]
Leaving aside the fact that ‘partisan’ doesn’t necessarily equal ‘wrong,’ what the hell are you talking about? I never said she wanted to deny affluent people medical care, only that she wanted to force them to accept government health care. And I never said she wanted to throw doctors–or anyone else–in jail for no reason. I said I’d heard or read that she wanted to impose penalties including jail or prison terms to anyone who tried to circumvent it by paying for it themselves (the patients) or by accepting payment for it (the doctors).
Now this may or may not be the case; no one seems to know.
But be that as it may, your characterization of my allegations is way off base, as I’m sure you know.
[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
I never said she wanted to deny affluent people medical care, only that she wanted to force them to accept government health care.
[/quote]
[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
I know. I was just funnin’.
Btw, anyone interested can watch Hillary’s eye-rollingly phony performance here. She appears at first to be hamming it up and having fun, and then gets serious in her cornpone right before she mentions "Mayur Palllmur…raht her frum…Trentin, New Jersey.
Why anybody would believe a word out of this woman’s mouth is a mystery to me. Frankly, I don’t think her supporters care whether she’s telling the truth about anything or not, they just know that she’s a Democrat and that’s good enough for them.
[/QUOTE]
You ever see Trent Lott speaking to his constituency back home, instead of to the nation? When he’s speaking nationally, he has a bit of a drawl. When he’s speaking to a Louisiana audience, he sounds like he has a mouth full of mush.
It’s not just Hillary, it’s all of us. **Dangerosa **hasn’t lived in the south in more than 30 years, and she still finds herself starting to drawl when speaking to southerners. I’ve never even been to England, but I spent summers working at the MN Renaissance Festival doing a crappy English accent… and when I’m talking to British people, I find myself starting to sound like them. Mimicry is something we do as humans, to sound like others.
We get it, SA. You really intensely dislike the woman. Can you give it a rest?
Here’s the full clip of Hilary speaking - turns out she was quoting a southern hymn - and yes, she was putting on an affect, but she wasn’t hiding that she was putting on an affect. Both before and after the quoted part she’s speaking in her normal voice.
Dunawake, nice work on the links. Although one article dated back to 1996, the Cato Institute article was from last year. Since there is no evidence that Hillary’s plan ever included penalties on patients or penalties for seeking or offering medical care outside the government system, I’m wondering why the Cato Institute is bringing this up again. Surely they know that the myth has been debunked. I wonder if they are doing a little swiftboating.
Welcome to the SDMB!
That would not be the dalect common to the people she was addressing.
Starvin’ Darlin’, I challenge you not to vote for two white men yet again.
[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
Frankly, I don’t think her supporters care whether she’s telling the truth about anything or not, they just know that she’s a Democrat and that’s good enough for them.
[/QUOTE]
I’m sure a lot of people in this thread, myself included, would hardly count themselves amongst Hillary’s ‘supporters.’
We’ll still cheerfully debunk your Rush/Drudge/whoever talking points about her. But by now, if you were not blinded by your own special combination of partisanship and stupidity, you would have long ago realized that those folks have little regard for the truth. They simply fling a lot of shit at their targets, and hope some of it sticks.
[QUOTE=Zoe]
Since there is no evidence that Hillary’s plan ever included penalties on patients or penalties for seeking or offering medical care outside the government system, I’m wondering why the Cato Institute is bringing this up again.
[/QUOTE]
I’d wager that Cato has the original bill on file, and that its pages are dog-eared and worn.
